In this paper, I will share the main findings from the first sub-study of my PhD research focusing on a neglected area of research within global citizenship education (GCE): upper secondary vocational education and training (VET).

We are facing unprecedent global crises, ranging from climate emergency to political extremism and the ongoing pandemic. In particular non-governmental organisations have been promoting global citizenship education for dealing with complex challenges such as global poverty, migration or human rights in an ethical, constructive manner. In 2015, GCE was also included in the target 4.7. of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. During the recent years, GCE has become more prominent in educational curricula, and has consequently gained importance also in academic research (Bourn, 2020; Harshman et al., 2015).

GCE is an umbrella term, encompassing other educations with similar concerns, agendas and methodologies: development education, human rights education, education for sustainability, education for peace, and intercultural education, among others (Wegimont, 2020). The conceptualisation and implementation of GCE varies enormously around the world. Depending on the social, historical and political contexts, GCE manifests itself differently depending on how the objective of learning is understood, how critically global issues are addressed, and how learners are positioned. In their meta-analysis, Pashby et al. (2020) have classified the numerous typologies of GCE into three discursive orientations: neoliberal, liberal and critical. In the neoliberal orientation, the role of education is to serve economic rationale and build human capital to maximise the employability of students. The liberal orientation relies on universal values, respect, democracy and international political institutions such as the UN, highlighting global understanding, empathy and openness. The critical orientation is very distinct from these two by its emphasis on changing the status quo, analysing power relations and addressing social injustices, but perhaps most importantly, rethinking the desired future and change from multiple perspectives.

However, vocational education and training (VET) has been largely ignored in the research and practice of GCE until now. Although the emphasis on sustainable development in VET is increasing, the accent tends to be on “green skills” and technological solutions towards producing competent workforce, and less on empowering learners to engage with social and environmental challenges as ethical questions. The scarcity of democracy and human rights education in VET has been noted in several studies (Council of Europe, 2017; Rautiainen et al., 2014). According to Nordic research, VET students’ civic education is about offering a passive, duty-oriented stance to citizenship, whereas general upper secondary education promotes active participation and critical thinking (Brunila et al., 2013; Lappalainen et al., 2019). VET students themselves say that they have limited possibilities to participate meaningfully as citizens and make their voice heard (Meriläinen & Piispa, 2020). This way, young people in different educational pathways are positioned differently in terms of political agency, which may even exacerbate the class divide (Nylund et al., 2018). Excluding VET students from global citizenship is not only a concern of equality in education, but may also have serious consequences for social cohesion and democracy.

The objective of my doctoral research is to generate empirical knowledge on how global citizenship is understood and enacted in upper secondary vocational education and training (VET), both on the policy level and in praxis. While the focus in later stages will be on the Finnish VET context, this first sub-study will examine the international framework of policy documents guiding the development of VET systems. The main research question for this sub-study is: “What types of global citizenship are constructed in texts describing the competence needs of vocational students for the future working life?”

My theoretical framework draws on critical theory which requires self-reflection and questioning in particular the power structures and injustices in the existing social reality (Alvesson & Sköldberg, 2017). Accordingly, the methodology has been designed for a deep, qualitative inquiry. The research data for the first sub-study will consist of various publications - documents, green papers and studies - focusing on the future of VET, in particular on the anticipated competence needs of the future working life. These documents will be analysed using critical discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2001, 2003) and employing Atlas.TI qualitative analysis software. The purpose of critical discourse analysis (CDA) is to understand, reveal, change and challenge assumptions, in particular societal injustices which are constructed and reproduced in texts (van Dijk, 2001). CDA aims at unveiling the powerful relationship of language with power, and showing “how language contributes to the domination of some people by others” (Fairclough, 2001). Critical discourse analysis of the data will thus contribute to a better understanding of what is being said, or left out, in societal, institutional and local discourses related to global citizenship in the future working life (Rogers, 2003). The preliminary list of relevant documents to be analysed is based on purposive sampling criteria. Firstly, and most importantly, the document discusses anticipated future skills and competences to be developed in particular through vocational education and training. Secondly, the documents are recent, not more than five years old. Thirdly, the text does not have to be officially endorsed, but it should be promoted by an international or national organisation. The documents selected include a publication from CEDEFOP (2020), the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training of the European Union, envisioning the future scenarios of vocational education in Europe; latest European Commission endorsed publications such as the Osnabrück Declaration; UNESCO publications, such as the a document on transversal skills in TVET (2015), and the report “Competences and Skills in 2035” by the Finnish National Forum for Skills Anticipation (2019).

The original contribution of this first sub-study is to develop knowledge on what kind of global citizenship is constructed and seen as desirable in the historical, social and ideological contexts of VET. The aim is to create valuable insights on how VET could better advance global social justice and human rights, and challenge the dominant neoliberal paradigm where VET is seen to primarily serve the needs of the economy and produce skilled workers for the labour market. As the analysis phase for this sub-study is currently ongoing, some of the questions to be discussed more in detail in the paper include: What is the balance between the three discursive orientations of global citizenship as proposed by Pashby et al. (2020): 1) neoliberal, instrumentalist view where global citizenship is understood in terms of efficiency and flexibility to function in the competitive global economy; 2) liberal, humanistic view where learners are supported in their human growth as active citizens of the world, towards a democratic dialogue with the “other”; and 3) critical global citizenship where the aim is to challenge power structures and global injustices through emancipatory, transformative learning? What assumptions on the purpose of VET underpin the discourses on the future competence needs in different organisations? What kind of differences and similarities are there between international and Finnish level discourses? The results will guide in generating questions for the questionnaire and interviews in the following phases of my PhD research.

Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. (2017). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research (3rd edition). SAGE Pub. Bourn, D. (Ed.). (2020). The Bloomsbury Handbook of Global Education and Learning. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350108769 Brunila, K., Hakala, K., Lahelma, E., & Teittinen, A. (Eds.). (2013). Ammatillinen koulutus ja yhteiskunnalliset eronteot. Gaudeamus. Cedefop (2020). Vocational education and training in Europe, 1995-2035: scenarios for European vocational education and training in the 21st century. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Cedefop reference series; No 114. http://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2801/794471 Council of Europe. (2017). LEARNING TO LIVE TOGETHER: Council of Europe Report on the state of citizenship and human rights education in Europe. https://www.coe.int/en/web/edc/report-on-the-state-of-citizenship-and-human-rights-in-europe Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power (2nd ed). Longman. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. Routledge. Harshman, J., Augustine, T., & Merryfield, M. M. (Eds.). (2015). Research in global citizenship education. Information Age Publishing Inc. Lappalainen, S., Nylund, M., & Rosvall, P.-Å. (2019). Imagining societies through discourses on educational equality: A cross-cultural analysis of Finnish and Swedish upper secondary curricula from 1970 to the 2010s. European Educational Research Journal, 18(3), 335–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904118814140 Nylund, M., Rosvall, P.-Å., Eiríksdóttir, E., Holm, A.-S., Isopahkala-Bouret, U., Niemi, A.-M., & Ragnarsdóttir, G. (2018). The academic–vocational divide in three Nordic countries: Implications for social class and gender. Education Inquiry, 9(1), 97–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2018.1424490 Osaamisen ennakointifoorumi. (2019). Osaaminen 2035. [Competences and Skills in 2035]. Osaamisen ennakointifoorumin ensimmäisiä ennakointituloksia. Opetushallitus. Raportit ja selvitykset 2019:3. Pashby, K., da Costa, M., Stein, S., & Andreotti, V. (2020). A meta-review of typologies of global citizenship education. Comparative Education, 56(2), 144–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2020.1723352 Rautiainen, M., Vanhanen-Nuutinen, L., & Virta, A. (2014). Demokratia ja ihmisoikeudet: Tavoitteet ja sisällöt opettajankoulutuksessa. Opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriö. http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/handle/10024/75251 Rogers, R. (Ed.). (2003). An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education. Erlbaum. UNESCO. (2015). Transversal Skills in TVET: Policy Implications Asia-Pacific Education System Review Series No. 8. UNESCO Bangkok. van Dijk, T. 2001. Critical Discourse Analysis. In D. Tannen, D. Schiffrin & H. Hamilton (Toim.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell, 352-372. Wegimont, L. (2020). Global Education in Europe: From Genesis to Theory and a New Model for Critical Transformation. In The Bloomsbury Handbook of Global Education and Learning (pp. 23–39). Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350108769.0010